Hutch Starskey
Diamond Member
- Mar 24, 2015
- 34,720
- 8,810
- 1,340
No, factually correct. You just need to understand the difference. Therein lies the problem.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
2016: The Year Americans Found Out Their Elections Are Rigged
- Thread starter JimBowie1958
- Start date
No, factually correct. You just need to understand the difference. Therein lies the problem.
the OP is correct. This is the year that the general population learned that our elections, especially the primaries, are fixed.
yes, its always been that way, but most people were not aware of it, that's the point of the thread.
and that is a good thing for the country.
That says more about "most people" than it does about parties " fixing elections". Primaries aren't even elections.
yes it does, most americans are sadly ignorant about how the country actually operates. you can thank the teachers union and liberal social-promotion bullshit.
You have GOT to be kidding. Hillary started off with hundreds of delegates in the form of SuperDelegates. If it were and honest and fair election on the Democratic side, Hillary would be about 200 delegates ahead with Bernie closing. As for them not calling Bernie names, Hillary and her minions spend a lot of times calling Bernie "unelectable" and a "big talker" who isn't leveling with the American people.
Keep
If you're trying to belittle me by calling me "sport", then you've failed because when your facts are wrong, your insults are meaningless.
Who's Winning the Presidential Delegate Count?
The supers don't count for anything until the convention there sport. Bernie is only down by 200 pledged delegates. If he pulls ahead you will see supers defecting to him. Clinton is the establishment candidate, is it surprising that the establishment supports her? To say that the supers in any way hinder Sanders with the amount of support and delegates he has won is ridiculous.
what planet are you posting from? many of the supers have already committed to clinton
Verbally committed. Is that really surprising though? Clinton is the establishment candidate. Sanders isn't even a Democrat running an anti- establishment campaign. Supers don't cast a vote until the convention. Sanders may lobby their support through the convention. If those supers were bound to Clinton you would have a point but they are not. Every one of them is up for grabs.
technically correct, but the delegate counts being bantered about by the media include the supers in the Clinton totals.
Unless the bitch is indicted, they will stay with her.
No, factually correct. You just need to understand the difference. Therein lies the problem.
technically and factually mean the same thing in that context, dipshit.
I was agreeing with you and you still have to be an asshole. you are a typical liberal.
Hutch Starskey
Diamond Member
- Mar 24, 2015
- 34,720
- 8,810
- 1,340
the OP is correct. This is the year that the general population learned that our elections, especially the primaries, are fixed.
yes, its always been that way, but most people were not aware of it, that's the point of the thread.
and that is a good thing for the country.
That says more about "most people" than it does about parties " fixing elections". Primaries aren't even elections.
yes it does, most americans are sadly ignorant about how the country actually operates. you can thank the teachers union and liberal social-promotion bullshit.
Where is your personal responsibility in this matter? It's the responsibility of the voters to educate themselves in the process and the issues. Blaming teachers and their unions is partisan bullshit and doesn't change the fact that you and most people hold google in their hands. You can educate yourself about anything at anytime.
Hutch Starskey
Diamond Member
- Mar 24, 2015
- 34,720
- 8,810
- 1,340
The supers don't count for anything until the convention there sport. Bernie is only down by 200 pledged delegates. If he pulls ahead you will see supers defecting to him. Clinton is the establishment candidate, is it surprising that the establishment supports her? To say that the supers in any way hinder Sanders with the amount of support and delegates he has won is ridiculous.
what planet are you posting from? many of the supers have already committed to clinton
Verbally committed. Is that really surprising though? Clinton is the establishment candidate. Sanders isn't even a Democrat running an anti- establishment campaign. Supers don't cast a vote until the convention. Sanders may lobby their support through the convention. If those supers were bound to Clinton you would have a point but they are not. Every one of them is up for grabs.
technically correct, but the delegate counts being bantered about by the media include the supers in the Clinton totals.
Unless the bitch is indicted, they will stay with her.
No, factually correct. You just need to understand the difference. Therein lies the problem.
technically and factually mean the same thing in that context, dipshit.
I was agreeing with you and you still have to be an asshole. you are a typical liberal.
No they don't dipshit. Using technically in that context suggests a caveat that may make an exception to the rule. Factual simply means that it is what it appears to be, nothing more.
The elections are not rigged in 2016 any more than they were rigged in previous years where the States abdocated (sp?) their responsibility to hold the elections to the various parties.
It's a very hard concept to wrap your head around but the framers never invisioned political parties managing elections, nominating conventions, majority/minority leaders, etc... It's hard because for our lifetimes (and likely those of your father) they have always been this way.
What should be happening is that there should be one ballot and you have everyone's name on it. Whomever gets a plurality would win. Now to ensure that the winner gets a majority (not a plurality), a runoff could be implemented but HRC and Donald Trump and Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders should all be on one ballot. The polling place should be staffed by trained state election officials (not party trained officials) who secure each ballot into a locked case. Then that ballot should be sent to the State Capitol to where the Secretary of State's office counts the ballots (we do this electronically now but you get the picture). There shouldn't be one case for Repubicans and one case for Democrats and the only people who should ever touch the ballots or the containers should be the voter and the certified state election official at the polling place.
What Trump is bitching about is easily fixed; get rid of the party nominating conventions and let the best candidate win a wide-open contest.
But the system is what the system has always been for my voting life. You have parties, the parties make their rules to benefit themselves; all participants know the rules (or should) going in. If they don't, shame on them. HRC's manager in 2008 didn't understand the landscape anymore than Trump's people seem to and they ended up losing to Obama who had unbelieveable wonks working for him.
The complaints are childish.
Candycorn,
That is the French system it is good and much fairer than the present system but it still supports larger parties and creates barriers for new ones...
A system like this is fairer
Now you could add Multiseat districts after than for congress and senate... That is a bit more complex but is a fantastic system to have which allows internal party contests among a wider vote... To explain that would probably need a separate thread.
I agree to a degree....
First let me say, ''the establishment'' is just a softer synonym for ''the PARTY''...... it's 'THE PARTY, the Republican Party, that is doing this to Trump....and as long as you all hang on to this regurgitation of calling it 'the establishment' you are HIDING who is truly doing this....it is the Republican Party, the RNC/the GOP that is doing this to Mr. Trump....
It is NOT THE SAME with the DNC and Bernie....
no one in the Democratic party is trying to STOP sanders, there is no #NeverSanders movement as there is a #NeverTrump....
NO ONE in the Democratic Party is out there trying to belittle Bernie, as the Republican Party has put out there to belittle Trump....
Trump is winning in the votes of the people AHEAD of all other Republican candidates
Sanders is losing by 2MILLION votes of the people, against Hillary....
Trying to bring the Democratic Party in to this by the author, is just diminishing what the Republican Party HAS CHOSEN TO DO against Mr. Trump.
You have GOT to be kidding. Hillary started off with hundreds of delegates in the form of SuperDelegates. If it were and honest and fair election on the Democratic side, Hillary would be about 200 delegates ahead with Bernie closing. As for them not calling Bernie names, Hillary and her minions spend a lot of times calling Bernie "unelectable" and a "big talker" who isn't leveling with the American people.
Keep
You have GOT to be kidding. Hillary started off with hundreds of delegates in the form of SuperDelegates. If it were and honest and fair election on the Democratic side, Hillary would be about 200 delegates ahead with Bernie closing. As for them not calling Bernie names, Hillary and her minions spend a lot of times calling Bernie "unelectable" and a "big talker" who isn't leveling with the American people.
Keep your lies to yourself.
If it were and honest and fair election on the Democratic side, Hillary would be about 200 delegates ahead with Bernie closing.
That's pretty much where we're at there sport.
Delegate results
2,383 needed for nomination · 1,938 still available
ClintonSanders1,7581,069
Pledged delegates 1,289 1,038
Superdelegates 469 31
If you're trying to belittle me by calling me "sport", then you've failed because when your facts are wrong, your insults are meaningless.
Who's Winning the Presidential Delegate Count?
The supers don't count for anything until the convention there sport. Bernie is only down by 200 pledged delegates. If he pulls ahead you will see supers defecting to him. Clinton is the establishment candidate, is it surprising that the establishment supports her? To say that the supers in any way hinder Sanders with the amount of support and delegates he has won is ridiculous.
what planet are you posting from? many of the supers have already committed to clinton
Verbally committed. Is that really surprising though? Clinton is the establishment candidate. Sanders isn't even a Democrat running an anti- establishment campaign. Supers don't cast a vote until the convention. Sanders may lobby their support through the convention. If those supers were bound to Clinton you would have a point but they are not. Every one of them is up for grabs.
The super delegates offer good optics as well... Rather than winning a tight race and having bitter blood. This puts the race beyond doubt and makes a candidates act in a civil manner...
Oh would the republicans like that now...
I agree to a degree....
First let me say, ''the establishment'' is just a softer synonym for ''the PARTY''...... it's 'THE PARTY, the Republican Party, that is doing this to Trump....and as long as you all hang on to this regurgitation of calling it 'the establishment' you are HIDING who is truly doing this....it is the Republican Party, the RNC/the GOP that is doing this to Mr. Trump....
It is NOT THE SAME with the DNC and Bernie....
no one in the Democratic party is trying to STOP sanders, there is no #NeverSanders movement as there is a #NeverTrump....
NO ONE in the Democratic Party is out there trying to belittle Bernie, as the Republican Party has put out there to belittle Trump....
Trump is winning in the votes of the people AHEAD of all other Republican candidates
Sanders is losing by 2MILLION votes of the people, against Hillary....
Trying to bring the Democratic Party in to this by the author, is just diminishing what the Republican Party HAS CHOSEN TO DO against Mr. Trump.
You have GOT to be kidding. Hillary started off with hundreds of delegates in the form of SuperDelegates. If it were and honest and fair election on the Democratic side, Hillary would be about 200 delegates ahead with Bernie closing. As for them not calling Bernie names, Hillary and her minions spend a lot of times calling Bernie "unelectable" and a "big talker" who isn't leveling with the American people.
Keep
If you're trying to belittle me by calling me "sport", then you've failed because when your facts are wrong, your insults are meaningless.
Who's Winning the Presidential Delegate Count?
The supers don't count for anything until the convention there sport. Bernie is only down by 200 pledged delegates. If he pulls ahead you will see supers defecting to him. Clinton is the establishment candidate, is it surprising that the establishment supports her? To say that the supers in any way hinder Sanders with the amount of support and delegates he has won is ridiculous.
what planet are you posting from? many of the supers have already committed to clinton
Verbally committed. Is that really surprising though? Clinton is the establishment candidate. Sanders isn't even a Democrat running an anti- establishment campaign. Supers don't cast a vote until the convention. Sanders may lobby their support through the convention. If those supers were bound to Clinton you would have a point but they are not. Every one of them is up for grabs.
technically correct, but the delegate counts being bantered about by the media include the supers in the Clinton totals.
Unless the bitch is indicted, they will stay with her.
Red, probably best you stay on your side of the fence... You don't know how adults behave.. We have this whole world where we can change our minds... Super delegates normally back the favourite (if asked) until convention...
Please stop trying to drag the Dems into RNC disaster...
JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,753
- 2,220
- Thread starter
- #129
It's not so much that the elections are rigged as it is the fact that Americans finally read 'the small print' on their party membership card. <description of rigged elections omitted for brevity>
What is a 'rigged election'?
It is an election where there is an illusion of a choice but the results have already been baked into the system.
That is what we have in the Democratic Party with the Super Delegates, as we all agree, and in the GOP where we have arcane rules drawn up by a kabal of party 'leaders' who will do whatever they damned well please to have their hand selected man win, and if not him then a clone of him.
That is why I love Trump and Sanders. Sanders is a very intelligent man intent on blowing up the system, though he doesnt label it that way. He wants to 'fix' Wall Street, and that will blow it all up as the payroll credit and near zero interest loans to the big corporations is their life's blood. 'Fix' Wall Street and you fix the corporate crony network at the source. Not that all the problems with corporate funding goes away, but in all likelihood it will end the excessive 'financial industry' profits that fund the whole thing.
I think everybody sees how Trump is impacting the GOP Establishment with his direct appeal to the People to end run the elites.
All in all, this election year is the most hopeful that I have seen since 1980.
Last edited:
what planet are you posting from? many of the supers have already committed to clinton
Verbally committed. Is that really surprising though? Clinton is the establishment candidate. Sanders isn't even a Democrat running an anti- establishment campaign. Supers don't cast a vote until the convention. Sanders may lobby their support through the convention. If those supers were bound to Clinton you would have a point but they are not. Every one of them is up for grabs.
technically correct, but the delegate counts being bantered about by the media include the supers in the Clinton totals.
Unless the bitch is indicted, they will stay with her.
No, factually correct. You just need to understand the difference. Therein lies the problem.
technically and factually mean the same thing in that context, dipshit.
I was agreeing with you and you still have to be an asshole. you are a typical liberal.
No they don't dipshit. Using technically in that context suggests a caveat that may make an exception to the rule. Factual simply means that it is what it appears to be, nothing more.
you continue to display your ignorance, now coupled with arrogance.
JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,753
- 2,220
- Thread starter
- #131
Lol, but that is exactly WHY it will never work that way.It makes more sense to do it the way you're describing; no doubt.
If the sheep recognize the slaughter knife, they get a tad nervous.
You have GOT to be kidding. Hillary started off with hundreds of delegates in the form of SuperDelegates. If it were and honest and fair election on the Democratic side, Hillary would be about 200 delegates ahead with Bernie closing. As for them not calling Bernie names, Hillary and her minions spend a lot of times calling Bernie "unelectable" and a "big talker" who isn't leveling with the American people.
Keep
If you're trying to belittle me by calling me "sport", then you've failed because when your facts are wrong, your insults are meaningless.
Who's Winning the Presidential Delegate Count?
The supers don't count for anything until the convention there sport. Bernie is only down by 200 pledged delegates. If he pulls ahead you will see supers defecting to him. Clinton is the establishment candidate, is it surprising that the establishment supports her? To say that the supers in any way hinder Sanders with the amount of support and delegates he has won is ridiculous.
what planet are you posting from? many of the supers have already committed to clinton
Verbally committed. Is that really surprising though? Clinton is the establishment candidate. Sanders isn't even a Democrat running an anti- establishment campaign. Supers don't cast a vote until the convention. Sanders may lobby their support through the convention. If those supers were bound to Clinton you would have a point but they are not. Every one of them is up for grabs.
technically correct, but the delegate counts being bantered about by the media include the supers in the Clinton totals.
Unless the bitch is indicted, they will stay with her.
Red, probably best you stay on your side of the fence... You don't know how adults behave.. We have this whole world where we can change our minds... Super delegates normally back the favourite (if asked) until convention...
Please stop trying to drag the Dems into RNC disaster...
both parties are trying to find ways to ignore the votes of the people in the primaries.
Get off the partisan bullshit train and deal with reality.
JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,753
- 2,220
- Thread starter
- #133
Verbally committed. Is that really surprising though? Clinton is the establishment candidate. Sanders isn't even a Democrat running an anti- establishment campaign. Supers don't cast a vote until the convention. Sanders may lobby their support through the convention. If those supers were bound to Clinton you would have a point but they are not. Every one of them is up for grabs.
technically correct, but the delegate counts being bantered about by the media include the supers in the Clinton totals.
Unless the bitch is indicted, they will stay with her.
No, factually correct. You just need to understand the difference. Therein lies the problem.
technically and factually mean the same thing in that context, dipshit.
I was agreeing with you and you still have to be an asshole. you are a typical liberal.
No they don't dipshit. Using technically in that context suggests a caveat that may make an exception to the rule. Factual simply means that it is what it appears to be, nothing more.
you continue to display your ignorance, now coupled with arrogance.
Well, definitely a different world view anyway.
The only thing Clinton has going for her right now is 'inevitability', and if the Supers swing, then *poof* she is not POTUS for at least another 4 more years.
- Oct 7, 2011
- 38,401
- 4,162
- 1,130
The illusion of choice
Hutch Starskey
Diamond Member
- Mar 24, 2015
- 34,720
- 8,810
- 1,340
Verbally committed. Is that really surprising though? Clinton is the establishment candidate. Sanders isn't even a Democrat running an anti- establishment campaign. Supers don't cast a vote until the convention. Sanders may lobby their support through the convention. If those supers were bound to Clinton you would have a point but they are not. Every one of them is up for grabs.
technically correct, but the delegate counts being bantered about by the media include the supers in the Clinton totals.
Unless the bitch is indicted, they will stay with her.
No, factually correct. You just need to understand the difference. Therein lies the problem.
technically and factually mean the same thing in that context, dipshit.
I was agreeing with you and you still have to be an asshole. you are a typical liberal.
No they don't dipshit. Using technically in that context suggests a caveat that may make an exception to the rule. Factual simply means that it is what it appears to be, nothing more.
you continue to display your ignorance, now coupled with arrogance.
Technically all men are created equal, but in practice, the fact is some, as you have repeatedly shown, are really just dumb.
The supers don't count for anything until the convention there sport. Bernie is only down by 200 pledged delegates. If he pulls ahead you will see supers defecting to him. Clinton is the establishment candidate, is it surprising that the establishment supports her? To say that the supers in any way hinder Sanders with the amount of support and delegates he has won is ridiculous.
what planet are you posting from? many of the supers have already committed to clinton
Verbally committed. Is that really surprising though? Clinton is the establishment candidate. Sanders isn't even a Democrat running an anti- establishment campaign. Supers don't cast a vote until the convention. Sanders may lobby their support through the convention. If those supers were bound to Clinton you would have a point but they are not. Every one of them is up for grabs.
technically correct, but the delegate counts being bantered about by the media include the supers in the Clinton totals.
Unless the bitch is indicted, they will stay with her.
Red, probably best you stay on your side of the fence... You don't know how adults behave.. We have this whole world where we can change our minds... Super delegates normally back the favourite (if asked) until convention...
Please stop trying to drag the Dems into RNC disaster...
both parties are trying to find ways to ignore the votes of the people in the primaries.
Get off the partisan bullshit train and deal with reality.
Yup. The Democrats don't want Sanders as their standard bearer any more than the Republicans want Trump or Cruz as their standard bearer. The difference is that the Democrats are at least honest about it in that they will direct their large contingency of super delegates to the candidate of their choice. They let us know up front that the party bosses will decide. There has never been any question about that.
The RNC has to change rules and do all sorts of behind the scenes manipulation to find a way to derail the Trump/Cruz train that, under the existing rules, would be the only two candidates eligible to be the nominee by the time of the convention. And that looks a whole lot more dishonest and sleazy.
hangover
Gold Member
- Oct 8, 2013
- 5,734
- 642
- 190
2016: The Year Americans Found Out Their Elections Are Rigged
No this country figured that out when the SCOTUS appointed Shrub as POTUS.
No this country figured that out when the SCOTUS appointed Shrub as POTUS.
JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,753
- 2,220
- Thread starter
- #138
Yup. The Democrats don't want Sanders as their standard bearer any more than the Republicans want Trump or Cruz as their standard bearer.
You do realize by now, surely, that Republicans and Democrats are not some great huge monolithic entity with one giant will of 100% agreement, right?
JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,753
- 2,220
- Thread starter
- #139
OK, Moveon now2016: The Year Americans Found Out Their Elections Are Rigged
No this country figured that out when the SCOTUS appointed Shrub as POTUS.
2016: The Year Americans Found Out Their Elections Are Rigged
No this country figured that out when the SCOTUS appointed Shrub as POTUS.
wrong, that was the electoral college.
what do you think you accomplish by calling bush, shrub? It only makes you look like a partisan fool
Similar threads
- Replies
- 7
- Views
- 85
- Replies
- 17
- Views
- 173
- Replies
- 24
- Views
- 160
- Replies
- 27
- Views
- 280
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 10
- Views
- 40
- Replies
- 63
- Views
- 632
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 14
- Replies
- 107
- Views
- 746
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8051
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 469
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-